Australian forests: Resource security or national heritage

In Australia, the debate has intensified with respect to the continued logging of old‐growth forests and export of woodchips. This has developed into antagonism between conservationist groups on one side, and a coalition of trade unions and business enterprises on the other. Much of the antagonism has been played out in the political arena around the issue of ‘resource security’ legislation. The specific legislation was defeated in 1992, but it is argued herein that this has not and will not conclude an on‐going debate around similar issues. The material consequences of economic recession have provided an interdependency between agents of the working class and capital to exploit native forests for the full value of the existing timber. This coalition of interests is having an effect not only on political discourse and policy determination but even the valuation of forest ecology itself. This paper examines the economic, technical and ethical parameters of that debate and concludes that the material interests of labour and capital will be pertinent to long‐term outcomes. The first man who, having enclosed a piece of land, thought of saying ‘this is mine’ and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. How many crimes, wars, murders; how much misery and horror the human race would have been spared if someone had pulled up the stakes and filled in the ditch and cried out to his fellow men: Beware of listening to this imposter. You are lost if you forget that the fruits of the earth belong to everyone and that the earth itself belongs to no onel (Rousseau 1984; p. 109).