Australian Forestry Standard Goes Global
by Jasmin Malik Chua, Jersey City, USA on 09.17.07
Australia's $18 billion forestry industry now boasts its own internationally recognized Australian Forestry Standard (AFS), a certification scheme that assures consumers that they are buying wood products from sustainably managed forests and plantations.
One tuned-in reader points out, however, that the AFS may be complicit in greenwashing the logging industry's destructive practices, as evident in its endorsement of Gunns Limited, an AFS-certified company that has been denounced for its illegal logging of old growth forests in Tasmania.
Backing this up is a 2004 World Wildlife Fund report that concludes that the only certification worth giving a hoot about is the Forest Stewardship Council's (FSC), which "gives consumers clear assurances and is meaningful and trustworthy."
The AFS is now recognized worldwide through its sanction by the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes.
Around 9 million hectares (22 million acres) of Australian forests are now AFS-certified through government forestry operations in Victoria, New South Wales, Tasmania, South Australia, and Queensland.
A $200,000 government fund will be disbursed to help small forest growers attain AFS certification, according to Forestry and Conservation Minister Eric Abetz. ::The Age and ::Australian Forestry Standard
Would this be the same Australian Forestry Standard (AFS) that approved Gunns Ply Ltd as sustainable? Gunns are clear-cutting the Tasmanian old growth forests and getting certified by the AFS as sustainable for their troubles. The Australian government has said their activities in Tasmania may be illegal.
I also recall that the AFS is not accepted by the UK Government's Central Point of Expertise on Timber (CPET) because it is not considered sustainable and legal.
Perhaps TreeHugger could check it's information a little more stringently before endorsing a questionable organisation? Or if the situation for AFS has changed perhaps TreeHugger could be stating what the AFS has changed to become acceptable?
Anymore, it's gotten so hard to tell exactly what all these ratings mean, and if they're even valid. As Richard said, there's so much corruption within all of these rating systems that it's hard to know exactly what's really going on.