That is according to a peer-reviewed study published this year in npj Natural Hazards, which used the McArthur Forest Fire Danger Index (FFDI) and an ensemble of dynamically downscaled CMIP6 climate projections to model how extreme fire weather will evolve under different levels of global warming.

Across Australia, once-in-twenty-year and once-in-fifty-year extreme fire events are projected to become 2.7 and 3.7 times more likely under 3°C of global warming. Whilst in southeast Australia’s eucalyptus forests those same benchmark events are projected to be 2.1-2.5 times more likely at the same warming level.

Tasmania faces the sharpest trajectory of any region studied.

Under 3°C of warming, 20-year return interval fire weather events are projected to become 3.2 times more likely, whilst 50-year return interval events are projected to become 4.1 times more likely. And even at 2°C of warming, Tasmania’s equivalent risk multipliers are 2.0 and 2.3, respectively.

The study, led by Ryan McGloin, warns that the Tasmanian findings warrant special attention, describing the projections as “particularly significant given Tasmania’s history of destructive bushfires and unique and vulnerable ecosystems that are potentially at risk of being replaced by more flammable vegetation when exposed to more frequent fires.”

The warning is grounded in history. The 1967 Black Tuesday fires killed 62 people and destroyed nearly 3,000 structures across southern Tasmania. Whilst in January 2013, fires razed 203 homes in the village of Dunalley alone. And unlike mainland forests, Tasmania’s vegetation mosaic — fire-sensitive rainforests, alpine shrublands and wet forests — faces a feedback loop in which more frequent fires progressively shift the landscape towards more flammable, fire-adapted vegetation.

A cycle, the authors say, has no natural brake.

The drivers differ by region. In Tasmania and southern Victoria, for example, projected increases in extreme fire weather are driven primarily by rising maximum temperatures, compounded by declining spring rainfall, which lifts the drought factor and lowers relative humidity on the continent’s worst fire days.

In the subtropical eucalyptus forests of southern Queensland and northern New South Wales, increasing humidity associated with a shift towards positive phases of the Southern Annular Mode partially moderates the temperature impact, resulting in the study’s lowest projected increases. There, 20-year and 50-year return interval events are still projected to become 1.8 and 2.0 times more likely at 3°C — figures the researchers describe as not immaterial.

Spring has emerged as the season of greatest concern. Severe fire weather days (FFDI ≥ 50) are projected to rise substantially in north-western and central Australia, while Very High fire weather days (FFDI between 24 and 50) are projected to increase in both the north and south. The pattern points to an earlier onset and overall lengthening of the fire season — with a shrinking window for hazard-reduction burns, a direct operational consequence for fire agencies.

The study — authored by Ryan McGloin, Ralph Trancoso, Jozef Syktus, Rohan Eccles, Nathan Toombs and Andrew Dowdy — is the first to apply the latest CMIP6 downscaled projections under different global warming levels to fire weather extremes specifically for southeast Australia’s eucalyptus forests.

For more information: McGloin, R., Trancoso, R., Syktus, J. et al. Substantial increases in the likelihood of extreme fire weather events for fire-prone ecosystems in Australia. npj Nat. Hazards 3, 28 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44304-026-00193-9

Wood Central understands the deal is expected to fetch more than $100 million, with Gresham House, the UK asset manager with close to AU$7 billion in forestry and natural capital assets, making a play for the 22,000-hectare beef, dairy and cropping property 140 kilometres north-east of Launceston.

And its plans go far beyond milk and beef, with large-scale pine plantations, carbon projects, biodiversity credits and income from Australia’s Nature Repair Market all in the mix.

However, not everyone in the state’s north-east is welcoming the change.

“You can’t eat pine trees, that’s a big one,” according to St Helens beef farmer and former Liberal MP John Tucker, who spoke to ABC Rural Tasmania over the weekend. “I think it’s got a lot of potential for livestock farming out in that area. A lot more potential in my opinion than trees.”

Meanwhile, Rhys Beattie, the mayor of the Dorset Council, said that whilst the council is not opposed to forest-based industries, it is calling on both federal and state governments to carefully consider the implications of large-scale agricultural land conversions: “The preservation of productive agricultural land is vital to the sustainability and prosperity of our community.”

At the same time, TasFarmers president Ian Sauer has taken the matter to Canberra, meeting Federal Agriculture Minister Julie Collins to clarify what financial assistance, if any, is being directed toward tree planting in the north-east.

Gresham House’s track record.

Wood Central understands that the firm has managed forestry assets for more than 4 decades and is the world’s 7th-largest forestry investment manager. In December, it closed the first tranche of its Sustainable International Forestry Strategy Platform at €250 million — anchored by Worcestershire Pension Fund and Australian superannuation fund NGS Super — the first time an Australian super fund has partnered with the UK forest giant. The strategy targets allocating 40 per cent to Australia and New Zealand, with the balance split between Europe and other afforestation investments.

NGS Super chief investment officer Ben Squires said sustainable forestry aligns with the fund’s objectives to achieve stable, risk-adjusted returns while contributing to global climate and biodiversity goals.

It comes as Tasmania’s farmland commands the highest median price per hectare in the country, with investor appetite increasingly driven by carbon, biodiversity and renewable energy income alongside productive agricultural land. Rushy Lagoon is already earmarked for the ACEN Australia-managed North East Wind project — 210 turbines across Rushy Lagoon and Waterhouse — which was declared a project of state significance in 2022.

Sale agent Jarrod Ryan of RMS Advisory has declined to confirm details, saying only there is “nothing to report at this stage.” Gresham House was contacted for comment on the Rushy Lagoon bid specifically.

• To learn more about Gresham House’s timber strategy, click here for Wood Central’s special feature.

That is according to Pulse Tasmania, which reports the rig is designed to replicate the planned venue’s fixed-roof structure and will assess whether a treated version of the stadium’s ETFE roof material can eliminate the shadow problem that has dogged the project since early 2025.

Shadows have plagued the design from the beginning.

Last year, Wood Central reported that Cricket Australia and Cricket Tasmania wrote to the Tasmanian government demanding architects redesign or remove the roof entirely, saying the fixed-dome design made the venue “unlikely to be conducive to hosting Test matches” — and potentially unworkable for one-day and T20 fixtures too.

At the time, Anne Beach, the CEO of the Macquarie Point Development Corporation, told a parliamentary inquiry that the transparent covering created contrast on clear days — and that the timber and steel beams, engineered as small as possible, would still cast shadows.

However, in November, a Gold Coast company identified a potential fix: Cricket Tasmania CEO Dom Baker proposed a matte treatment that, when applied to one side of the ETFE material, would disperse light rather than pass straight through —  killing the sharp contrasts on the pitch.

Until this week, it had never been physically tested. Now, the rig will run assessments on shadow intensity, ball visibility, and playing conditions. It will also capture data on how roof treatments affect turf growth beneath — a secondary concern for groundskeepers at an indoor venue.

It comes after both houses of the Tasmanian Parliament approved the $1.13 billion project in December — the Upper House voting 9–5 after two days of debate. The 23,000-seat venue will be the permanent home of the Tasmania Devils AFL team. Its fixed dome, framed in Tasmanian-sourced glulam, would be the largest timber roof on any stadium in the world.

What the roof actually looks like

Late last year, Wood Central reported that the current design documents detail a hybrid timber roof lined with Tasmanian-sourced glulam, paired with metal deck cladding, steel rod bracing, and translucent ETFE pillows. The clearspan structure carries an internal clearance of 49 metres — enough headroom for Test-level cricket as well as AFL, soccer, and rugby.

The Macquarie Point Summary Report specifies lightweight ETFE pillows, a 20-millimetre timber laminate, a secondary glulam system, and Aramax metal deck cladding, all supported by steel rod bracing. The timber form is designed to reduce perceived bulk from street level and preserve harbour sightlines — a tough ask for a structure sitting on the edge of Hobart’s CBD.

It comes after the Coalition and the Greens crossed the aisle to force the Australian National University to hand over documents underpining the method.

The motion put by NSW Nationals Senator Ross Cadell, a long-time supporter of Australia’s $23 billion forest-based industries, orders the ANU to produce substantive written communications between its staff and the federal environment department DCCEEW; consultancy and research services agreements connected to the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee; and gift deeds or gift forms tied to work undertaken by Professor Andrew Macintosh.

One of the key drivers of this Order of Production of Documents (OPD) was that the Emissions Reduction Assurance Commission is currently considering whether to recommend that the Minister approve this method despite the ANU not making the primary documentation available to the public during the consultation process, thereby denying Australia’s forest scientists the ability to test the proposed method’s calculations

Wood Central understands that the decision by the Greens and key crossbench Senators to back the motion is of key consequence. “These strange bedfellows are far from natural allies,” according to Stuart Coppock, a lawyer with legal standing on the model. “And their calculation is simple — they want to know who has been funding the Macintosh model and why…including a focus on the gift deeds.”

It comes after ERAC Chair Professor Karen Hussey last year confirmed to a Senate committee that the New South Wales Great Great Koala National Park, which will take out 40% of the state’s hardwood supply, cannot be established without its approval.

The ACCUs generated under the scheme are the funding mechanism.

If the documents that come back show that external interests have impacted the science underpinning the method, it calls into question the integrity of a method put forward by the New South Wales Department of Environment and Heritage.

Wood Central understands there have been sustained concerns across the sector for some time, centred on two specific failures. “It suffers from key integrity failures, particularly additionality and leakage, and does not meet the evidence-based standard required by the Australian Government’s Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee,” Coppock said. And on leakage, the argument is blunt.

Underpinning concerns are a genuine scientific dispute over carbon storage. “Does halting harvesting in Australian native forests produce the long-term sequestration that the Macintosh model claims? The majority of independent peer reviewers say no,” another source said. “So do scientists work inside the NSW Government. So does ABARES — the research arm of the Commonwealth’s own Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. The method does not meet the evidence-based standard that the ERAC is legally required to apply.”

When the documents are produced, the Senate will see whether the model was built to find an answer or to deliver one.

The ANU will have to answer either way.

That is according to the latest ABARES Agricultural Commodities Report, published yesterday, which revealed that the gross value of forestry (GVP) production is expected to reach $2.23 billion in 2026-27 — a 3 per cent nominal increase or a 1 per cent real increase. And over the medium term, the GVP is projected to drop back $2.1 billion, with no material growth expected until at least 2030-31.

By the numbers, total gross value production in forests has dropped by 36 per cent over the past eight years — from about $3.4 billion in 2017-18 — with softwood relatively steady at about $1.5 billion, hardwood plantations flatlining at $0.5 billion and native forest continuing what is now a 20-year decline.

According to Diana Hallam, CEO of the Australian Forest Products Association, whilst the topline figures point to the vital role of sustainable forestry in producing essential products, the report also identified serious challenges and headwinds for the sector.

“Some of these challenges and risks include high manufacturing and energy costs, greater use of structural steel in residential and mid-rise construction, as well as a growing amount of imported timber products of varying quality flooding the Australian marketplace, including from China,” she said.

Hallam said the new estimates also reaffirmed the importance of aligning the government’s policy with Australia’s Timber Fibre Strategy, which outlines opportunities for the industry to make a greater contribution to national goals in carbon, innovation, and housing construction.

Softwood up, hardwood down, native at historic lows

The value of softwood plantation production is forecast to increase slightly in 2026-27, driven by short-term movements in detached housing demand. But ABARES warns that a gradual shift toward higher-density dwellings is expected to temper timber demand over the medium term, whilst projected increases in softwood log availability will ease unit prices.

Hardwood plantation production, however, is heading the other way.

And that’s because ongoing shifts in global paper markets are placing downward pressure on woodchip demand, whilst Vietnam’s growing share of global trade — combined with projected exchange rate changes — is continuing to erode Australia’s competitiveness overseas. ABARES expects Australian hardwood woodchip exports to settle at similar volumes but lower unit prices, with Australia holding a smaller, more specialised role in the market.

And then there is native forestry, where production has now fallen to historically low levels following 20 years of contraction driven by the transfer of multiple-use public native forests to nature conservation reserves and increased harvest restrictions.

A $570 million downward revision

ABARES has slashed its forestry forecast by more than $570 million — a 21 per cent revision from its December report — with exports the major driver of the writedown, down more than $619 million amid weaker production and prices.

It comes days after this masthead reported on a new white paper from the Rozetta Institute arguing that Australia needs a national roadmap to boost forest productivity and encourage new capital into the market.

On Friday, Wood Central spoke to the white paper’s lead author, Steve Walker, Principal of Terrafolia Advisory, and co-author Dr Lyndall Bull, who revealed that Australian plantations produce just 15 to 18 cubic metres per hectare per year against international benchmarks of 30 to 50.

And on Monday, Walker went further, telling Wood Central the sector’s decades-long focus on cost discipline had come at the expense of genuine value creation. “Lifting productivity on the land already planted is the fastest and most scalable opportunity,” Walker said. “International benchmarks in Brazil, India, Vietnam and China demonstrate that 30 to 50 cubic metres per hectare per year is achievable using proven technologies already available.”

“If we can do this, we can ultimately strengthen our capacity to produce more competitive engineered wood products like LVL and other EWPs,” he said, adding that the downstream benefits could add tens of millions of dollars to regional communities.

• For more information, including the ABARES full March 2026 Agricultural Commodities Report, visit the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences.

Now, Australian Sustainable Hardwoods (ASH) — the country’s largest hardwood processor — says a $600,000 AFWI-funded research project is helping the industry find its way forward, with new species, new engineered products and new performance data that could change how timber windows are specified in Australia.

Daniel Wright, ASH’s National Business Development Manager, told Wood Central that window manufacturers are a big part of the company’s supply chain — from commodity and painted windows through to high-end architectural manufacturers — mostly across south-eastern states, but with a growing presence in northern New South Wales.

And Wright said the fallout from the decision to cease harvesting in Victorian forests has been immediate. “The window manufacturers of south-east Australia have been forced into a lot of change with the cessation of native timber in Victoria — just like we have,” he said. “But they also have upcoming changes to the NCC, which will structurally change how many of them operate.”

“Of course, what impacts our supply chain also impacts us.”

That disruption created confusion. “We’ve recently seen imported plantation timbers in the window market that don’t meet the specs they are intended for,” Wright said. “This was a direct result of Victoria’s hardwood being suddenly ceased. The window makers were trying to do the right thing, but were forced to make quick decisions.”

As one of the major stakeholders in the AFWI–AGWA Modernising Timber Windows project, led jointly by the Timber Development Association and the Australian Glass and Window Association, Australian Sustainable Hardwoods is providing timber species for testing their performance in modern systems.

“When we were asked to be involved, we saw this project as an opportunity to work together and help the window makers collectively find pathways forward that not only suit their specific needs, but also comply with upcoming changes to the NCC,” Wright said.

The project is also a chance for ASH to advance one of its newer species — Plantation Oak — as the company rebuilds markets lost when Victorian ash was taken away. Made from Shining Gum logs grown in a plantation for pulp, Plantation Oak is upgraded by ASH into higher-end, longer-term applications. Wright said a small part of every log can be used for architectural applications, but the majority needs to be engineered to get the best out of it.

“We’ve had success with Plantation Oak in MASSLAM, but in order to use this fibre in other market segments, we need to help build the standards and examples that everyone can follow with confidence,” he said. ASH is one of 10 timber suppliers involved in the project, alongside the Pentarch Group and others.

Now, the testing programme is about to shift up a gear.

Speaking to Wood Central today, Kylan Low — the Structural Engineer at the Timber Development Association leading the project — said next week’s round will put four configurations through their paces: a double-hung window, an awning and casement window, an awning and double casement window, and a centre bifold door. Low said the configurations are designed to capture various hardware setups used across the industry and will be tested under combined air and water pressure for durations representing storm periods.

In January, Low told Wood Central that the industry had been craving this kind of data for a very long time: “Window data hasn’t kept up with changes in codes, glazing, and timber supply.”

The project has also given a platform to the next generation. Jesse Ross — a Graduate Engineer at AGWA who has been working alongside Low since the project’s inception — recently shared his reflections on what has become his first major engineering project. Ross said that, unlike uPVC and aluminium systems, there was no prime operator in the timber window sector, meaning the entire system had to be built from the ground up.

Early testing revealed that some Australian hardwoods, such as Spotted Gum and Blackbutt, could outperform European staples. But given the project’s focus on species substitution, the team chose to work with the lowest passing species it could find. Designs have settled on 55/58 mm sash profiles with 24 mm glazing pockets, accommodating modern insulated glass units and manufacturable by small-scale workshops.

Ross said the industry engagement phase — travelling to state forums, meeting joiners, hardware suppliers and timber providers — was one of the most eye-opening parts of the experience. He found some joineries still working with outdated designs that didn’t fully comply with AS 2047 or accommodate drained insulated glass units.

“I learned that innovation is not just about creating new ideas,” Ross wrote, “but also about making them accessible to your audience.” The documentation phase — technical manuals, substitution procedures, shop drawings — is now underway, aiming to give any Australian joinery everything it needs to start building with confidence.”

The Modernising Timber Windows project is one of 30 research initiatives funded through AFWI — a $200-million-plus institute backed by $100 million in Commonwealth funding. It is generating new structural and performance data across a range of solid and engineered wood products, testing how timbers perform under AS 2047, Australia’s mandatory standard for windows and external glazed doors.

• To learn more about the Australian Forest and Wood Innovations programme, visit AFWI’s dedicated website.

“Wesbeam has a foundation where capable, committed people are aligned to a clear purpose and take pride in what they deliver. My focus is on strengthening that culture while driving disciplined performance and operational excellence,” Everest said. “Wesbeam’s scale and national reach, combined with its reputation for quality and reliability, position us strongly as engineered timber continues to gain broader acceptance in residential and commercial construction.”

With an eye to the future, Everest said his focus is on disciplined execution and extracting full value from the platform already built. His priorities include operational excellence and productivity, safety leadership and capability development, strategic customer and stakeholder partnerships, sustainable and disciplined growth, and market expansion through innovation.

Asked why Wesbeam, Everest pointed to the company’s reputation for quality, reliability, and national reach — attributes that have cemented its role as a critical supplier to builders, merchants, and frame-and-truss manufacturers across the country. Wesbeam, he said, is a business built on “capable, committed people aligned to a clear purpose,” adding that strengthening that culture while driving disciplined performance will remain central to his leadership.

Wesbeam operates a world‑scale, 24/7 manufacturing facility in Neerabup, Western Australia, supported by a long‑term plantation timber supply agreement with the WA Government. That agreement provides a level of security and consistency that has become increasingly rare in a market grappling with supply‑chain volatility.

Everest also acknowledged the outstanding contribution of outgoing CEO James Malone, who retired after leading Wesbeam through major phases of growth and capability development. “James and the team have built strong foundations,” Everest said. “My focus is on respecting that legacy while helping the organisation continue to evolve, execute and perform.”

Founded in 2001, Wesbeam has grown into a nationally significant manufacturer with distribution hubs across Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane. The company employs just under 300 people and has been recognised as a Great Place to Work for three consecutive years, whilst investment in automation, plant upgrades and sustainability initiatives continues to lift productivity as Australia looks to expand housing supply and reduce the construction industry’s carbon footprint.

• To learn more about Wesbeam and its projects, click here for Wood Central’s special feature on Bluerock Project’s Tupy Gardens, a $25 million timber-framed apartment complex where Bluerock picked Wesbeam’s LVL over brick.

Gordon, who has been Finland’s Honorary Consul to Tasmania since 2016, has been instrumental in strengthening Finland’s ties with Tasmania, particularly in advanced industries (including in forestry and bioproducts), research, and maritime capability.

Appropriately awarded at the Forest – the University of Tasmania’s new timber-domed masterpiece – Gordon was recognised before a crowd of dignitaries, including the Governor of Tasmania, the Honourable Barbara Baker AC, and senior state officials and parliamentarians.

In his remarks, Arto Haapea, Finland’s ambassador to Australia, said Gordon’s career in forestry made him a natural bridge despite more than 15,000 kilometres of separation: “Finland is a bioeconomy powerhouse; Tasmania is a forestry state delving into sustainability, innovation and global markets,” the ambassador said.

In accepting the high prize, Gordon thanked those who supported him in becoming an active honorary consul, “including the Finnish community in Tasmania that has made me feel welcome and included, the staff at the Finnish Embassy and in particular His Excellency Arto Haapea for his support and guidance,” he told Wood Central today.  “I would also like to thank my wife, Dr Dianne Snowden AM, family and friends who have always supported me in my endeavours.”

“The connections between Finland and Tasmania are strong, not just through the supply by the Finnish company RMC of the new state-of-the-art Spirit of Tasmania vessels but also in areas such as the bio economy and Forest and land management,” Gordon stressed. “We have much to learn from each other, and continuing engagement is of benefit to both parties.”

Gordon, who began his career with the Tasmanian Forestry Commission in the late 1970’s, has been a key figure in shaping the direction of Australian forestry and forest science for decades, including in his current role as chair of Australia’s Forest and Wood Innovations (AFWI) research and development program, which, through projects like The Precinct and the Fibre and Fuels project, are creating new and highly valuable pathways for Australia’s forest fibre.

The latest honour comes months after Gordon was awarded the N.W. Jolly Medal, Forestry Australia’s highest honour, during Forestry Australia’s National Conference in Adelaide, in recognition of a career that saw Gordon help lead the merger of the Institute of Foresters of Australia and the Australian Forest Growers in 2021.

• To learn more about Bob Gordon, click here for Jim Bowden’s exclusive interview with Bob from July 2023 – including his passion for Australian forestry.

“The targeting of workers this week across multiple forestry and timber worksites is unacceptable,” according to a statement obtained by Wood Central this afternoon. “Our members have the right to go about their work safely and without harassment. Interfering with active worksites puts workers at serious risk.”

“Everyone has the right to protest and to make their case, no matter how misinformed it may be. But targeting workers is never acceptable.”

“Our union has a proud history of speaking truth to power — including through protest and civil disobedience where necessary — but decisions about land use, forestry policy and resource allocation are not made by mill workers, harvesting crews or truck drivers. Targeting workers is cowardly and wrong.”

Bob Brown Foundation is a “reactionary fringe group”

“The anti-worker tactics of the Bob Brown Foundation cement its reputation as a reactionary fringe group and confirm that it is more interested in self-promotion than sustainability.”

“Dressing up seedy attacks on workers and their communities as a so-called ‘Forest Resistance Tour’, and self‑appointing as ‘Forest Defenders’, fools no one.”

“Their arrogance and ignorance would be laughable if the consequences for workers and regional communities were not so serious. Workers deserve better.”

“Our members work hard to support their families and communities and, like every other worker, deserve respect and safety at work. The union is examining every option available to ensure there is no repeat of the disgraceful events of this week.”

All week, Wood Central has reported on the week‑long “Forest Resistance Tour,” which has seen 100 “forest defenders” target multiple sites across the state (and around the country), including storming Ta Ann’s Smithton mill over several days.

• To learn more about the Timber, Furnishings and Textiles Union (TFTU), Australia’s only union dedicated to timber workers, click here.

So far, more than 100 participants are involved in coordinated actions at multiple sites, with the foundation declaring that “the resistance is only growing” as the campaign enters its third day.

It comes as Treasurer Eric Abetz questioned why activists were targeting operations that use plantation and regrowth timber:

Protesters, however, claim Ta Ann is logging high‑conservation‑value native forest – a claim industry flatly rejects. Ta Ann Tasmania general manager Robert Yong dismissed the allegations, arguing they were “based on the wrong information”.

“Once again, green protestors are disrupting a fully complying, lawful business that adds value to sustainable supplies of hardwood logs, turning them into veneer and plywood products to supply much‑needed building materials,” Yong said. He added that Ta Ann was “the only company to contractually protect the conservation outcomes of the Tasmanian Forest Agreement”.

The Tasmanian Forest Products Association condemned the demonstrations as targeted and dangerous, accusing activists of showing “complete disregard” for workers who depend on the industry. “Let’s be clear, trespassing on active worksites whilst using hostile tactics is not peaceful protest,” chief executive Nick Steel said. “It is reckless, unlawful and completely unacceptable.”

Steel argued that protesters could not obstruct “hard‑working Tasmanians” from conducting lawful business, adding that “there is deep hypocrisy in campaigning against well‑regulated, regenerated Tasmanian forestry while continuing to consume timber and paper products every day”.

He also warned that shutting down local supply would only increase reliance on imported products “often sourced from countries with deforestation, illegal logging and minimal environmental oversight”.

The disruption follows arrests on the first day of action, with Pulse Tasmania reporting that a 70‑year‑old South Australian woman and a 23‑year‑old Western Australian woman were taken into custody on trespass charges. Despite this, activists returned in greater numbers today.

Among them was retired schoolteacher and grandparent Anna Markey. “I am disgusted and terrified that the government here subsidise this foreign company to destroy and profit from our beautiful native forests,” she said. “Every tree counts. All forest life matters at a time when fires, floods and heatwaves are destroying our homes. These companies must leave the forests now.”

The Bob Brown Foundation said today’s action marked day two of a planned week of protests, with participants travelling from across Australia. Two tree‑sitters spent the night in the canopy near Lake St Clair, while others continue to occupy forests in the Central Highlands.

Yong reiterated that the protests were putting workers at risk. “Their attack on Ta Ann puts the employment and health and safety of employees going about their business at risk,” he said. “They are misguided because their campaign is based on wrong information. Protestors are showing poor judgment and should support companies like ours that value and use regrowth and plantation log supplies.”

Please note: Wood Central will have additional coverage from the protest in the coming days.