They allow for the logging of native timber on public land if certain conditions are met, like protecting endangered species and biodiversity, but have been heavily criticised as ineffective by environmentalists.
In the case’s December hearing, barrister Ron Merkel, QC, on behalf of the foundation, argued the regional forest agreements were not enforceable as they damaged the purpose of legislation that aimed to protect the environment, native species and prevent extinction.
Swift parrots are critically endangered.
On Wednesday the Federal Court ruled against this argument, dismissing the application and finding the Tasmanian agreement did constitute a regional forest agreement under the act.
Last year, Victorian environmentalists had a significant win when the Federal Court ruled state-owned logging agency VicForests had breached environmental laws by logging areas in the Central Highlands that were the habitat of the critically endangered Leadbeater’s possum.
This prompted the Bob Brown Foundation to see if a similar legal challenge could be made in Tasmania. But its case differed from the Victorian example because it claimed that the Tasmanian regional forest agreement did not fit the definition of one under the act.
VicForests remains under legal pressure, facing at least five court challenges from crowdfunded community environmental groups.
Loading
A statutory review of national environment laws, released last week, called for the removal of exemptions for the logging industry that are created under regional forestry agreements.
Former competition watchdog head Graeme Samuel’s final report from his once-in-a-decade review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act said there were “fundamental shortcomings” in the interactions between regional forest agreements and the act.
On social media, the Bob Brown Foundation said the court decision would not stop its campaign to end native logging.
The Age has approached Sustainable Timber Tasmania for comment.
More to come
