Clearfelling and burning is introduced and broad scale destruction of Leatherwood begins.
Forestry researchers recognize that clearfelling and burning policies are unsustainable (Neyland and Hickey, 1990, Leatherwood Silviculture implications for apiculture, TasForests 2: pg 63-72) and advise beekeepers to seek Leatherwood outside of areas subject to clearfelling and burning.
The first Pollination Services conference is jointly organised by the Tasmanian Beekeepers Association and the State Department of Primary Industry.
The Forests and Forest Industry Council (FFIC), which beekeepers have been a member of since 1990, commissions a study on the Leatherwood nectar resource (K.I. Ziegler, Leatherwood Resource Report, FFIC, 1993).
The Regional Forest Agreement promises to enhance and develop the beekeeping industry but at the same time $65 million is given to the State to intensify forest practices dependent on clearfelling and burning. Beekeepers are given the community forest agreement which only retains small, token areas of Leatherwood if possible and where practical.
Beekeepers start to rally again and in 2002 a submission is made to the Resource Planning and Development Commission (RPDC) inquiry into the Southwood project which beekeepers see as an exercise to continue and even speed up the conversion of Leatherwood in old growth forests to regrowth. This is followed by a submission to the RPDC inquiry into the implementation of the RFA in August 2002.
The association writes to many orchardists and seed crop growers in Southern Tasmania (where the bulk of pollination is required) soliciting their support for resource security over the remainder of the accessible Leatherwood on state forest lands.
The Forests and Forest Industry Council (FFIC), which beekeepers have been a member of since 1990, commissions a study on the Leatherwood nectar resource (K.I. Ziegler, Leatherwood Resource Report, FFIC, 1993).
Forestry Tasmania and the Tasmanian Beekeepers Association agree to have more formal planning sessions to try to incorporate Leatherwood management into their planning processes more thoroughly. After two years of this process and much time spent by beekeepers in mapping Leatherwood in coupe designs, important Leatherwood areas are still being scheduled for clearfelling and burning.
Forestry Tasmania publishes it's Facts on Bees advertisment in The Mercury. The Association responds with a press release rebutting the ad.
The Forests and Foresty Industry Council (FFIC) set up the Apiary Working Party (AWP), a joint Ministerial council (involving Parks: now Paul Lennon, Forestry: now Bryan Green and Primary Industry: now Steve Kons).
The Tasmanian Beekeepers Association develops the Leatherwood Management Code as its response to the recommendation of the RPDC.
Following more press coverage of the situation, Forestry Tasmania publishes a slightly modified advertisement of their earlier Facts on Bees piece in The Mercury. The Association responds with it's own half page advertisement called The True Facts on Bees. Forestry Tasmania gives no response.
The Tasmanian Beekeepers Association makes a submission to the Legislative Council scrutinising Forestry Tasmania. A full report is available in the March newsletter.
Copyright © SaveYourLeatherwoodHoney.com 2021
