Murray has been running a small business harvesting blackwood from public native forest in the Otway Ranges in south west Victoria, supplying the tonewood market.
As I said back then, Murray has been operating on borrowed time with the inevitable closure of public native welfare forestry in Victoria.
That time has now come.
But Murray and his son James are determined to fight to the last!
They have started a petition calling for the continuation of public native welfare forestry in Victoria:
Murray’s two main customers, Maton and Cole Clark, are remaining silent about the situation. They understand the risks involved in wading into the deeply divisive Forestry Wars.
It is likely that most guitarists would favour saving our public native forests from logging vs saving the Kidman business.
How can you claim your business is sustainable when clearly the tonewood market is anything but sustainable?
The story of Otway Tonewoods is just another step on the long slow decline of the tonewood market in Australia. The music marketplace refuses to take any responsibility for its own future.
How many people in Australia own a guitar or other musical instrument made from wood? How many of these people make a living from their music?
How many music festivals are there in Australia?
How many music shops are there in Australia?
All of this will disappear unless someone starts growing tonewoods and is openly supported by the marketplace!
Sitting on our hands waiting for politicians or someone else to fix the problem just wont work.
Trying to prop up a failed industry (public native welfare forestry) wont work.
It is disappointing that neither Maton nor Cole Clark wont even start a conversation about the future supply of tonewoods. Crisis! What crisis??
They want us to believe that the future supply of tonewoods is completely under control. Is the shutting down of Otway Tonewoods part of their sustainable future?
When will the marketplace wake up?
It can’t whilst Maton and Cole Clark continue their current charades.
With all due respect to Murray and James Kidman, their social license is about to expire with no option for renewal.
Will it be a turning point for the music industry in Australia?
Murray has been running a small business harvesting blackwood from public native forest in the Otway Ranges in south west Victoria, supplying the tonewood market.
As I said back then, Murray has been operating on borrowed time with the inevitable closure of public native welfare forestry in Victoria.
That time has now come.
But Murray and his son James are determined to fight to the last!
They have started a petition calling for the continuation of public native welfare forestry in Victoria:
Murray’s two main customers, Maton and Cole Clark, are remaining silent about the situation. They understand the risks involved in wading into the deeply divisive Forestry Wars.
It is likely that most guitarists would favour saving our public native forests from logging vs saving the Kidman business.
How can you claim your business is sustainable when clearly the tonewood market is anything but sustainable?
The story of Otway Tonewoods is just another step on the long slow decline of the tonewood market in Australia. The music marketplace refuses to take any responsibility for its own future.
How many people in Australia own a guitar or other musical instrument made from wood? How many of these people make a living from their music?
How many music festivals are there in Australia?
How many music shops are there in Australia?
All of this will disappear unless someone starts growing tonewoods and is openly supported by the marketplace!
Sitting on our hands waiting for politicians or someone else to fix the problem just wont work.
Trying to prop up a failed industry (public native welfare forestry) wont work.
It is disappointing that neither Maton nor Cole Clark wont even start a conversation about the future supply of tonewoods. Crisis! What crisis??
They want us to believe that the future supply of tonewoods is completely under control. Is the shutting down of Otway Tonewoods part of their sustainable future?
When will the marketplace wake up?
It can’t whilst Maton and Cole Clark continue their current charades.
With all due respect to Murray and James Kidman, their social license is about to expire with no option for renewal.
Will it be a turning point for the music industry in Australia?
Murray has been running a small business harvesting blackwood from public native forest in the Otway Ranges in south west Victoria, supplying the tonewood market.
As I said back then, Murray has been operating on borrowed time with the inevitable closure of public native welfare forestry in Victoria.
That time has now come.
But Murray and his son James are determined to fight to the last!
They have started a petition calling for the continuation of public native welfare forestry in Victoria:
Murray’s two main customers, Maton and Cole Clark, are remaining silent about the situation. They understand the risks involved in wading into the deeply divisive Forestry Wars.
It is likely that most guitarists would favour saving our public native forests from logging vs saving the Kidman business.
How can you claim your business is sustainable when clearly the tonewood market is anything but sustainable?
The story of Otway Tonewoods is just another step on the long slow decline of the tonewood market in Australia. The music marketplace refuses to take any responsibility for its own future.
How many people in Australia own a guitar or other musical instrument made from wood? How many of these people make a living from their music?
How many music festivals are there in Australia?
How many music shops are there in Australia?
All of this will disappear unless someone starts growing tonewoods and is openly supported by the marketplace!
Sitting on our hands waiting for politicians or someone else to fix the problem just wont work.
Trying to prop up a failed industry (public native welfare forestry) wont work.
It is disappointing that neither Maton nor Cole Clark wont even start a conversation about the future supply of tonewoods. Crisis! What crisis??
They want us to believe that the future supply of tonewoods is completely under control. Is the shutting down of Otway Tonewoods part of their sustainable future?
When will the marketplace wake up?
It can’t whilst Maton and Cole Clark continue their current charades.
With all due respect to Murray and James Kidman, their social license is about to expire with no option for renewal.
Will it be a turning point for the music industry in Australia?
Murray has been running a small business harvesting blackwood from public native forest in the Otway Ranges in south west Victoria, supplying the tonewood market.
As I said back then, Murray has been operating on borrowed time with the inevitable closure of public native welfare forestry in Victoria.
That time has now come.
But Murray and his son James are determined to fight to the last!
They have started a petition calling for the continuation of public native welfare forestry in Victoria:
Murray’s two main customers, Maton and Cole Clark, are remaining silent about the situation. They understand the risks involved in wading into the deeply divisive Forestry Wars.
It is likely that most guitarists would favour saving our public native forests from logging vs saving the Kidman business.
How can you claim your business is sustainable when clearly the tonewood market is anything but sustainable?
The story of Otway Tonewoods is just another step on the long slow decline of the tonewood market in Australia. The music marketplace refuses to take any responsibility for its own future.
How many people in Australia own a guitar or other musical instrument made from wood? How many of these people make a living from their music?
How many music festivals are there in Australia?
How many music shops are there in Australia?
All of this will disappear unless someone starts growing tonewoods and is openly supported by the marketplace!
Sitting on our hands waiting for politicians or someone else to fix the problem just wont work.
Trying to prop up a failed industry (public native welfare forestry) wont work.
It is disappointing that neither Maton nor Cole Clark wont even start a conversation about the future supply of tonewoods. Crisis! What crisis??
They want us to believe that the future supply of tonewoods is completely under control. Is the shutting down of Otway Tonewoods part of their sustainable future?
When will the marketplace wake up?
It can’t whilst Maton and Cole Clark continue their current charades.
With all due respect to Murray and James Kidman, their social license is about to expire with no option for renewal.
Will it be a turning point for the music industry in Australia?
Over the last 40 years there have been numerous strategies and reports written about farm forestry in Australia and the various issues and challenges it faces (someone needs to do a literature review). Many recommendations have been made and few if any recommendations have ever been implemented.
So here we are in 2021 and history is repeating itself once again.
The Federal Government wants to produce a National Farm Forestry Strategy.
The idea of Farm forestry was initiated in Australia in the mid-1960s. And here we are 50+ years later and pretty much nothing has happened.
Why has farm forestry failed in Australia?
Because politics and forestry welfare have always trumped profitable tree growing, ie. farm forestry. That was true 50 years ago and is still true today.
Reading the “Background” section on this Federal Government website just makes me cringe!! Is this some kind of prospectus? If so it is a 100% failure!
Is farm forestry about profitable tree growing? Apparently not!
All this glossy forest industry rhetoric will be familiar to some people, who will shake with fear as it rekindles memories of the Managed Investment Schemes (MIS), Australia’s biggest ever corporate swindle.
Farm forestry is still competing against Government sawmill welfare and a forest industry dominated by rentseekers and protectionist policies. Profitable tree growing is not on anyone’s agenda. Tree planter beware!!
My previous blog about functional wood markets is very relevant here.
Farm forestry will continue to struggle in Australia until we establish proper functioning wood markets, and that must be driven by the marketplace not politicians, bureaucrats and rentseekers.
We definitely need a National Farm Forestry Strategy but the focus must be on profitable tree growing, developing commercial credibility in the forest industry, and coordinating the support of the marketplace.
It is not about providing subsided logs to local businesses!
Competitive transparent markets must be supported, including log export markets.
In New Zealand no one talks about farm forestry, because in NZ the Government plays no part in the forest industry. Farmers growing trees IS the forest industry in New Zealand.
Farm grown blackwood timber at Ceres Fair Wood, Melbourne. $10,000 per cubic metre. Ceres Fair Wood is one of the few businesses in Australia that cares about the future of quality wood.
The Past/Present
For thousands of years humans have been using wood for all sorts of reasons – to hunt, cook, stay warm, build shelter and wage war. And for all that time we have had natural forests to plunder. Whatever wood we could find we used, mostly with plenty of contempt and waste.
But the days of plundering natural forests are just about over.
One of the problems this history has created is dysfunctional wood markets.
Cheap plentiful wood from natural forests has meant no one has ever taken responsibility for the future. Cutting down and sawing up trees is simple. Getting trees planted and managed for the future is the real challenge.
There are thousands of businesses in Australia that rely on wood (harvesting, transport, milling, retail, manufacture, craft, music, art, etc.), and 99.99% of them take no interest or responsibility in the future supply of wood.
There is no relationship in the market between using and consuming wood and a tree being planted and managed.
Third party certification schemes such as Responsible Wood/PEFC and FSC are not building the forest industry and growing more wood for the future. Their goal is to save and better manage existing natural forests, not to grow more new wood resources.
The fact that the forest industry in Australia has never established any commercial credibility hasn’t helped the situation.
There must be a credible, transparent relationship between the price of wood and the cost of planting, growing and managing trees; and that relationship must encourage and support more tree planting to meet future demand.
My focus here is especially the premium solid wood market.
Until we build proper functioning wood markets in Australia most of these Australian businesses will disappear. Some will switch to imported wood when public native welfare forestry is shut down, but many will close. All for the want of a proper functioning wood market.
The Future
There are plenty of challenges that need to be addressed in order to build proper functioning wood markets but they are not insurmountable.
Possibly the first and greatest challenge is market (and consumer) recognition and responsibility.
Proper functioning wood markets in Australia must be driven by the market and consumers.
Recent comments in the media by furniture makers and builders in Western Australia (in response to the shutting down of public native forestry) do not provide encouragement. Can you believe they would rather import timber from Indonesia than support local farm forestry?
How the thousands of wood-dependent businesses in Australia will come together to coordinate and plan their future is part of this challenge. Most of these businesses are too small to achieve much by themselves. The Australian Furniture Association could take on this role for furniture makers. Builders, cabinet makers and retailers could possibly join the AFA in this.
2. The second challenge is getting the farming community on board to plant, grow and manage the trees that the market wants.
I personally think this second challenge is by far the easier of the two.
Once farmers see the market change to being responsible and supportive they will quickly get on board.
There will need to be some serious talking and building trust, and careful management of risk.
Unlike the past where the market could pick and choose from a wide variety of natural forest woods, the market must now decide on which species it wishes to promote and support in farm forestry. Species must be fast growing and command sufficient market price to allow farmers to grow them commercially. Given we are talking 30+ years between investment/planting and harvest/revenue/profit, this will require careful consideration, coordination and planning.
The idea that farmers just randomly plant hundreds of different tree species in the hope of finding a buyer in the future just wont work. Farm forestry for the growing of high quality premium solid wood will require coordination and planning, driven by the market.
This is where organisations like the AFA must play a central role.
Final some discussion about markets.
Will there still be demand for premium quality solid wood in 30+ years time?
Certainly over my 40+ year career as a forester I have seen premium quality solid wood go from a being a common cheap product to a scarce expensive product, with all indications leading to its eventual disappearance from the Australian market entirely.
I think this is primarily a supply issue, rather than one of demand.
I see sufficient evidence that the market is prepared to pay very high prices for quality solid wood.
The problem is that in a dysfunctional wood market, these price/demand signals don’t trigger a supply response as they should. If we had a strong farm forestry culture in Australia and proper functioning wood markets, these price/demand signals would be making front page news. That is where we need to get too!
Farm grown blackwood timber at Ceres Fair Wood, Melbourne. $10,000 per cubic metre. Ceres Fair Wood is one of the few businesses in Australia that cares about the future of quality wood.
The Past/Present
For thousands of years humans have been using wood for all sorts of reasons – to hunt, cook, stay warm, build shelter and wage war. And for all that time we have had natural forests to plunder. Whatever wood we could find we used, mostly with plenty of contempt and waste.
But the days of plundering natural forests are just about over.
One of the problems this history has created is dysfunctional wood markets.
Cheap plentiful wood from natural forests has meant no one has ever taken responsibility for the future. Cutting down and sawing up trees is simple. Getting trees planted and managed for the future is the real challenge.
There are thousands of businesses in Australia that rely on wood (harvesting, transport, milling, retail, manufacture, craft, music, art, etc.), and 99.99% of them take no interest or responsibility in the future supply of wood.
There is no relationship in the market between using and consuming wood and a tree being planted and managed.
Third party certification schemes such as Responsible Wood/PEFC and FSC are not building the forest industry and growing more wood for the future. Their goal is to save and better manage existing natural forests, not to grow more new wood resources.
The fact that the forest industry in Australia has never established any commercial credibility hasn’t helped the situation.
There must be a credible, transparent relationship between the price of wood and the cost of planting, growing and managing trees; and that relationship must encourage and support more tree planting to meet future demand.
My focus here is especially the premium solid wood market.
Until we build proper functioning wood markets in Australia most of these Australian businesses will disappear. Some will switch to imported wood when public native welfare forestry is shut down, but many will close. All for the want of a proper functioning wood market.
The Future
There are plenty of challenges that need to be addressed in order to build proper functioning wood markets but they are not insurmountable.
Possibly the first and greatest challenge is market (and consumer) recognition and responsibility.
Proper functioning wood markets in Australia must be driven by the market and consumers.
Recent comments in the media by furniture makers and builders in Western Australia (in response to the shutting down of public native forestry) do not provide encouragement. Can you believe they would rather import timber from Indonesia than support local farm forestry?
How the thousands of wood-dependent businesses in Australia will come together to coordinate and plan their future is part of this challenge. Most of these businesses are too small to achieve much by themselves. The Australian Furniture Association could take on this role for furniture makers. Builders, cabinet makers and retailers could possibly join the AFA in this.
2. The second challenge is getting the farming community on board to plant, grow and manage the trees that the market wants.
I personally think this second challenge is by far the easier of the two.
Once farmers see the market change to being responsible and supportive they will quickly get on board.
There will need to be some serious talking and building trust, and careful management of risk.
Unlike the past where the market could pick and choose from a wide variety of natural forest woods, the market must now decide on which species it wishes to promote and support in farm forestry. Species must be fast growing and command sufficient market price to allow farmers to grow them commercially. Given we are talking 30+ years between investment/planting and harvest/revenue/profit, this will require careful consideration, coordination and planning.
The idea that farmers just randomly plant hundreds of different tree species in the hope of finding a buyer in the future just wont work. Farm forestry for the growing of high quality premium solid wood will require coordination and planning, driven by the market.
This is where organisations like the AFA must play a central role.
Final some discussion about markets.
Will there still be demand for premium quality solid wood in 30+ years time?
Certainly over my 40+ year career as a forester I have seen premium quality solid wood go from a being a common cheap product to a scarce expensive product, with all indications leading to its eventual disappearance from the Australian market entirely.
I think this is primarily a supply issue, rather than one of demand.
I see sufficient evidence that the market is prepared to pay very high prices for quality solid wood.
The problem is that in a dysfunctional wood market, these price/demand signals don’t trigger a supply response as they should. If we had a strong farm forestry culture in Australia and proper functioning wood markets, these price/demand signals would be making front page news. That is where we need to get too!
Creating a functional wood market in Australia
Creating a functional wood market in Australia
The Past/Present
For thousands of years humans have been using wood for all sorts of reasons – to hunt, cook, stay warm, build shelter and wage war. And for all that time we have had natural forests to plunder. Whatever wood we could find we used, mostly with plenty of contempt and waste.
But the days of plundering natural forests are just about over.
One of the problems this history has created is dysfunctional wood markets.
Cheap plentiful wood from natural forests has meant no one has ever taken responsibility for the future. Cutting down and sawing up trees is simple. Getting trees planted and managed for the future is the real challenge.
There are thousands of businesses in Australia that rely on wood (harvesting, transport, milling, retail, manufacture, craft, music, art, etc.), and 99.99% of them take no interest or responsibility in the future supply of wood.
There is no relationship in the market between using and consuming wood and a tree being planted and managed.
Third party certification schemes such as Responsible Wood/PEFC and FSC are not building the forest industry and growing more wood for the future. Their goal is to save and better manage existing natural forests, not to grow more new wood resources.
The fact that the forest industry in Australia has never established any commercial credibility hasn’t helped the situation.
There must be a credible, transparent relationship between the price of wood and the cost of planting, growing and managing trees; and that relationship must encourage and support more tree planting to meet future demand.
My focus here is especially the premium solid wood market.
Until we build proper functioning wood markets in Australia most of these Australian businesses will disappear. Some will switch to imported wood when public native welfare forestry is shut down, but many will close. All for the want of a proper functioning wood market.
The Future
There are plenty of challenges that need to be addressed in order to build proper functioning wood markets but they are not insurmountable.
Proper functioning wood markets in Australia must be driven by the market and consumers.
Recent comments in the media by furniture makers and builders in Western Australia (in response to the shutting down of public native forestry) do not provide encouragement. Can you believe they would rather import timber from Indonesia than support local farm forestry?
How the thousands of wood-dependent businesses in Australia will come together to coordinate and plan their future is part of this challenge. Most of these businesses are too small to achieve much by themselves. The Australian Furniture Association could take on this role for furniture makers. Builders, cabinet makers and retailers could possibly join the AFA in this.
https://australianfurniture.org.au/
Is the AFA up to the challenge?
2. The second challenge is getting the farming community on board to plant, grow and manage the trees that the market wants.
I personally think this second challenge is by far the easier of the two.
Once farmers see the market change to being responsible and supportive they will quickly get on board.
There will need to be some serious talking and building trust, and careful management of risk.
Unlike the past where the market could pick and choose from a wide variety of natural forest woods, the market must now decide on which species it wishes to promote and support in farm forestry. Species must be fast growing and command sufficient market price to allow farmers to grow them commercially. Given we are talking 30+ years between investment/planting and harvest/revenue/profit, this will require careful consideration, coordination and planning.
The idea that farmers just randomly plant hundreds of different tree species in the hope of finding a buyer in the future just wont work. Farm forestry for the growing of high quality premium solid wood will require coordination and planning, driven by the market.
This is where organisations like the AFA must play a central role.
Final some discussion about markets.
Will there still be demand for premium quality solid wood in 30+ years time?
Certainly over my 40+ year career as a forester I have seen premium quality solid wood go from a being a common cheap product to a scarce expensive product, with all indications leading to its eventual disappearance from the Australian market entirely.
I think this is primarily a supply issue, rather than one of demand.
I see sufficient evidence that the market is prepared to pay very high prices for quality solid wood.
The problem is that in a dysfunctional wood market, these price/demand signals don’t trigger a supply response as they should. If we had a strong farm forestry culture in Australia and proper functioning wood markets, these price/demand signals would be making front page news. That is where we need to get too!
So dear reader, what do you think?
Comments and ideas welcome.
Share this:
Like this:
Related