WHY ISN'T THIS PULP MILL IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA?
Gunns manages more hectares of tree plantations on mainland Australia than in Tasmania. The graph of ALL tree plantations in Australia (left) shows Tasmania in 4th position behind WA, Victoria and NSW. Recent data from DAFF (below) shows Tasmania trailing WA in hardwood plantations. Remember, pulp can be made from softwood or hardwood. WA is an economically viable location for a Gunns pulp mill. So why are Gunns obsessed with Tasmania? Where else could Gunns be able to assess their own project? Paper can be made as a by-product of wheat. Gunns do not even need trees to make paper. Its time Gunns shareholders woke-up.
Plenty of room for plantations in Australia but not a lot in Tasmania. Map on the right is of 'commercial environmental forestry'. Salinity is also shown, along with potential new plantations as hatched areas. Again, very small areas in Tasmania could be used compared to the rest of Australia. How did Gunns end-up with a legacy business model based entirely around exploiting and intimidating Tasmanians at the expense of the company's future? It appears Gunns are unable to wean themselves off the public teat and are implementing forward planning based on obsolete allegances and unethical resource suppliers such as Forestry Tasmania. Why would they ship woodchips AWAY from the world markets just to process them in Tasmania? If Gunns forest practices are now declared wrong, will they fully compensate the state of Tasmania for the damage they hace wraked over a 30 year period?
