Well. This intrepid possum went down to Officeworks, and found this.

Reflex Ultra White copier paper.

Yeah, big deal. But have a look at the logo. FSC Mix.

Yeah, another big deal.

But a real surprise to us, since Reflex Ultra White should not have FSC accreditation.

Why not? Because the wood it is made from is from the Central Highlands of Victoria.

This thread is about FSC accreditation and why it matters. And how Reflex gets away with using this logo.

With a few swipes at VicForests.

FSC stands for Forest Stewardship Council. It is considered the gold standard of wood certification. Not great, perhaps, but not terrible

The scheme, begun in 1993, aims to 'promote environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests'.

The logo you see asserts a chain of custody has been followed, with the wood originating in 'responsibly managed forests'.

Are the forests in Victoria well managed? Debatable.

But what cannot be denied is that VicForests, the government logging agency, IS NOT FSC ACCREDITED.

Not from lack of trying. Since 2008 it has tried three times. This year marks THE FOURTH.

The failed 2017 audit makes for some interesting reading. Essentially, VicForests failed because of 'numerous instances of harvest operations that had inadvertently extended into adjacent sensitive areas such as rainforest and endangered species habitat'.

And it wasn't just the FSC who had concerns. The Department of Environment itself took VicForests to court over illegal logging in Gippsland in early 2018.

It lost the case, but this court failure led to a shakeup of regulatory oversight.

Enter the OCR! And exit stage left.

So ... did VicForests fix the problem of illegal harvesting ? Don't be silly.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-19/vicforests-plan-to-log-native-ash-trees-on-public-land-maps-show/11805812

Another finding of the audit was that the agency had a 'coarse grain and largely desk based' approach to delineating lands under its management as High Conservation Value. (HCV)

Remember the Zinger coupe in Toolangi this year? It was not old growth, said VicForests. Yeah nah.

What else did they do wrong in 2017?

Oh yes. Community engagement.

Principal 4 of the FSC: the organization should engage with local communities to 'identify, avoid and mitigate' negative impacts of its management activities.

A separate but related principle (Principal 9) states that when it comes to logging areas of High Conservation Value, all stakeholders - even lefty environmental organizations like us - should be consulted.

In 2017, in relation to Principle 9, stakeholders complained of not being contacted about the HCV strategy, and of written submissions being ignored by VicForests.

So, do you think VicForests have made a concerted effort to improve engagement processes (both generally and specific to HCV areas)?

Ha! Let's dissect this recent tweet by the inspired wordsmith at @VicForestsComms, about the contentious Pat's Corner coupe at Warburton.

All of this is both true and not true.

Yes, there were statewide consultations.

Yes, there was a community drop in day.

Yes, there were meetings with locals about a specific coupe.

But what is not explained is that:

The community drop in session was cancelled, and became invitation only.

(Apparently VicForests feared an orderly meeting 'may not be possible').

And 'a coupe' discussed at subsequent meetings? We believe it was a coupe called Apu.

It was NOT Pat's Corner. This was only placed on the logging schedule in May, just before logging started.

So now you know why no concerns were raised about Pat's Corner.

VicForests appears to be getting worse, not better, when it comes to community engagement.

A recent policy change means coupe schedules, maps and plans are only released at the beginning of the month in which they are to be logged

You know, to ensure they are up- to-date.

All this matters. As a public agency, VicForests should be committed to openness. Not penning misleading tweets and hiding documents from the public until the last minute.

It matters also because - based on this cascade of failures to protect the environment, or engage stakeholders - we don't think VicForests should get accreditation.

Of course, VicForests itself is quite desperate to obtain the FSC logo.

And maybe fourth time is the charm.

And back to Reflex. The 'mix' appears to give this product a get-out-of-jail card.

It combines wood from other sources, including recycled paper.

But still ... How can a forest be 'responsibly managed' if the agency logging it REPEATEDLY FAILS FSC ACCREDITATION?

I DON'T KNOW! Maybe @FSC_IC can shed some light.

But if Reflex Ultra White is now a mix of sources, it is a very recent change. Some packets still lack the logo.

Even their website concedes that it lacks FSC accreditation.

This is speculative, but it could be that Australian Paper gave up on the idea that VicForests will obtain FSC accreditation, and sought a work around.

Officeworks committed to stop stocking non FSC products this year. Bunnings gave a similar commitment, with wriggle room.

But even with this new found and barely justifiable FSC accreditation, we would still say: don't buy Reflex Ultra White. It is made from ancient forests, the habitat of threatened species and a vital carbon store.

Try these brands of paper instead. https://ethicalpaper.com.au/