New NSW koala protection laws anger loggers

The NSW government will greatly increase the number of trees it protects for the preserv­ation of koala habitats.

The provisions will also expand­ the definition of a koala habitat to include any area with a ‘demonstrated koala presence’ to be recognised. Picture: Glenn Hampson

The NSW government will greatly increase the number of trees it protects for the preserv­ation of koala habitats, a move that has angered timber and ­logging groups, who say it will ­stifle development and pose a threat to their industries.

New planning provisions to be announced on Friday will ­expand the list of koala feed trees from 10 species to 123 across nine regions of the state, documents seen by The Australian say.

The provisions will also expand­ the definition of a koala habitat to include any area with a “demonstrated koala presence” to be recognised.

NSW Planning Minister Rob Stokes said the changes were being sought to “better identify and protect important koala habitats across the state”.

The provisions will take effect from March 1 next year, following community consultation.

“More than ever, we need to be protecting these iconic ­Australian animals,” Mr Stokes said.

Some industry bodies, however, remain deeply concerned about the koala protection ­proposals, saying they were blindsided by the announcement a week before Christmas and snubbed on consultation.

They said the provisions stood to have a drastic effect on private landholders who might want to develop their properties, subdivide or harvest trees to earn money.

The NSW government has been under significant pressure and criticism from community groups over its response to the ongoing bushfires that have ­destroyed koala habitats across the state.

Premier Gladys Berejiklian has been singled out for attack.

“I don’t understand why they want to impose such a dracon­ian-type approach,” said Noel ­Atkins, an industry consultant to the forestry sector.

“It will basically eliminate or make it extremely difficult for any further harvesting, or make it difficult for any subdivisions or property development.”

Similar plans were rejected by the NSW government in 2016 as being too onerous, he said.