Since late December 2000, 69% of Hancock's 182 operational timber plantations have been visited by Hancock Watch. At this stage it can be reported that at least 32% of Hancock's holdings are of high to high-medium conservation importance, with another 17% of medium conservation importance. In terms of certification this means that there are a number of key management/ecological issues in these plantations that need to be resolved before any discussion of certification can take place.

"By June 1987, when the policy of prohibiting the clearing of native public forests for plantations was implemented, 94,500 ha of softwoods had been planted on public land, some 78,000 ha (82.5%) of which had been cleared of native forest for this purpose"

p73 State of the Environment Report 1988. Victoria's Inland Waters. Office for the Environment.

In regards to Hancock operations throughout Victoria, 9 species of threatened native fish survive in waters that lay downstream of Hancock's operations. This is an issue of huge concern. Almost all of these species could be pushed further to the edge of extinction through excessive siltation of their waterways from logging operations or pollution entering their waterways through herbicide application. It is imperative that Hancock immediately establish appropriate buffer zones along drainage lines, permanent streams, temporary streams and wetlands in areas that don't already have these buffer zones. It is pleasing to note that existing buffer zones in many plantations are being respected by the company.

About another 17% of Hancock's plantations are of low to low medium conservation importance. These distinctions were made on the basis of the amount of native vegetation in the plantation, whether the plantation was located in domestic water catchments, was there endangered fish habitat downstream, the slopes of the various plantations and the buffer strips protecting streams and creeks in the plantation

At this stage almost all plantations in the Central, Benalla/Mansfield, Portland, Ballarat and Otways regions have been visited. The area with the least amount of information is the Strzelecki region with only 38% of the plantations being visited and the Ovens region with about 51% of Hancock lands having a visit from us. Nevertheless we feel that some important assumptions about Hancock's operations can be made.

Firstly the plantations of low conservation importance, therefore those more likely to gain possible certification are operational mainly in two areas; Portland and Ballarat. Of all the plantations of low conservation importance, Portland and Ballarat regions have about 76% of the lows between them. This is largely due to the fact that almost 20 plantations in these areas are located on flat land and are of small size. This we feel is more condusive to environmentally sustainable plantation forestry.

The areas of high conservation concerns not surprisingly were spread over a wider spectrum. Not surprisingly the Strzelecki's feature as Hancock's number one concern area with 28% of the total statewide high concerns (and that with only 38% of their plantations in the regions even being assessed!), with Ballarat, Ovens, Portland, Central, Benalla/Mansfield, Upper Murray and the Otways regions also factoring in. It is also clear that much of the concern regarding many of these plantations is the amount of native vegetation found within those plantations. If conservationists concerns could be eased regarding the protection and reaffforestation of many plantations this would be a significant step forward.

Therefore it is very encouraging to say that outside the Strzelecki's, Hancock Watch could only find a couple of examples of Hancock destroying native vegetation within their plantations. These breaches were most likely contractor errors but nevertheless it is very encouraging to see Hancock stay within their plantations in areas of where they have a native vegetation holding.

Furthermore Hancock is making attempts to improve their management in their number one problem area, the Strzeleckis. Due to constructive dialogue with and the actions of community groups, there have been some positive changes initiated by Hancock in the Strzeleckis, during the past 12 months.

These include;

*The commissioning of an independent forester and ecologist to undertake a field trip to advise on current practices and management programs.

* An inventory of the forest resource, including the ecological assets contained in the Hancock estate.

*Progess in writing a detailed Forest Management Plan for the Latrobe District.

*On ground marking of boundaries in all hardwood plantations, seperating the native vegetation, regenerating bush and plantation areas. Any sites of significance, habitat trees, rainforest and other sensitive ecosystems will be excluded and protected from harvesting.

*Consistency in the preparation of coupe plans detailing all stages of the harvesting operation.

*Support (including financial), along with the West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority and Gippsland Water, for research into a study of comparative land uses in the Strzelecki Ranges.

*Staff changes.

In the Strzeleckis, surface flow, sub-surface flow and mass movement of water all contribute to erosion. Further research is required to determine the types of erosion and where they are likely to occur in the Strzelecki bioregion.

Hancock Victorian Plantations needs to demonstrate to community groups actively involved with forest management issues, that they have a long-term commitment to improving environmental performance and that they are willing to provide the resources required in attaining sustainable practices.

Over time if successful, this example could provide a model/framework, for sustainable harvesting practices for the rest of the state. (Involving the community, responsible authorities and the timber industry).