The following are a number of claims found in company literature - most of which are featured in Boral's 1995 Annual Report "Forest Resource Policy"

"Obtain supply from State Forest only when these forests are being managed on a sustained yield basis."
"Sustained yield" goes back to Medieval Europe with the first formal legal definitions of sustained yield recorded in French Ordinances in 1347. Historically, the general concept was that an even-aged, simple forest would produce timber sustainably if it was cut in a way to allow the forest to grow incrementally. The standard of sustained yield should be restricted to the original idea of a highly regulated forest, which is simplified to deliver timber in a predictable manner, ie. a commodity - not an ecosystem - concept. The idea of sustained yield is medieval and should have gone out with the crosscut saw. Whether it's sustained yield, "according to sustained yield principles" or sustainable yields, it seems to mean that the timber industry can do more or less as it likes. There is no test, and no verifiable position of whether they've achieved it or not.52 Sustained yield should not be confused with ecologically sustainable yield. Sustained yield harvesting is designed to maximise the continued supply of timber, cutting the "overmature" old growth and turning wild forests into treefarms.

"Comply with all environmental requirements and codes of practice in both State Forests and on private land."
Boral protests its innocence by hiding behind inadequate environmental protection laws. Boral and its contractors have been associated with breaches of harvesting laws. Boral manages to distance itself from the destruction that is wrought in the forest by contracting out harvesting operations. Thus, in 1995, a case against partly-owned Boral subsidiary Derwent Forestry for logging in a streamside reserve in Tasmania was dismissed54 as it was found that the logging contractor was responsible for the breach - not Boral.

In July 1995 evidence was provided to the Commonwealth Government that SEPL breached the conditions of their export woodchip licence by taking woodchips from private property without the express permission of the Minister for Resources and without any environmental impact assessment. The Department of Industry (DoPIE) has neither investigated nor publicly reported these alleged breaches, but has admitted to the Senate that it does not monitor companies' compliance with export licence conditions.55 According to an ex-Boral employee,It is common knowledge in the industry that good sawlogs were routinely put into the chipper, when demand for sawlogs is low.56

There is also evidence from Victoria that the native forest industry is involved in deliberate widespread down grading of sawlogs for woodchipping (highly mechanised, low overheads, quick profit).57 Conservationists assert that it is possible that Boral timber is involved in the same downgrading.51

Boral sometimes does not even ask the permission of land owners that are effected by their operations. In 1995 contractors working for Forest Resources constructed a ford across the Upper Scamander River to enable the transport of a cable logging machine across the river. They had been refused permission by the Break O' Day Council to use the bridge because of the weight of the machine. The landowners did not give permission for their land to be used as access.58 Alerted to the presence of a potentially illegal crossing constructed of gravel and fill across the river, the Tasmanian Greens contacted the Department of land and Water with a view to taking legal action.59 The fill was immediately removed by Forest Resources, who maintained that they had simply been restoring the river to its pristine state. Contractors had dumped approximately sixty truckloads of gravel into the river, taken from a nearby quarry. Having been caught in the act, and failing to get the cable logger over the river, the contractors proceeded to dredge the river to remove the fill and dumped it a further two kilometres along the road, where they also attempted another crossing over Trout Creek, again using fill.60

"Manage company-owned forests to maximise wood production in a manner which is consistent with sustained yield and the long term protection of fauna, soil, water and sensitive scenic values."

This seems particularly hard to substantiate in view of Forest Resources' plantation management practices in Tasmania which include use of wildlife poisons, herbicides and disregard for visual management issues.

"Actively establish and develop plantations to minimise the use of old growth forests."
Approximately 71,000 ha 62 of native forests are cleared by the logging industry annually- way in excess of plantations established (approx. 20,000 ha per annum of first rotation softwood and hardwood). To make matters worse, Tasmania is covered by plantations established by Forest Resources on what was previously valuable native forest habitat.

"..in NSW no old growth forest is harvested to produce logs for woodchipping..."63
While this may be the case technically although some conservationists dispute this 50, it is undeniable that old growth forest ends up as export woodchips. SEPL's current Environmental Impact Statement also details plans for logging in areas that contain old growth in Pokolbin State Forest in the Cessnock Management Area 61 and old growth rainforest species of Brush box and Tallowwood in Wingham, near Taree have been logged.13

"great care is taken to protect wildlife habitats" 65
Boral's logging operations are known to endanger Koala habitats. Core Koala habitat was felled in 1995 at Pine Creek State Forest, near Bellingen, without an environmental impact statement, without the required assessment by the Regulatory and Public Information Committee and without compliance to the standard requirements for retaining habitat trees for wildlife66. In 1994 forest containing Koala colonies was logged at Doyles River State Forest, and Wild Cattle Creek. On October 23, 1995 Boral started logging koala habitat on the Bulga Plateau near Taree NSW without a licence to 'take and kill endangered species'. A Boral spokesperson interviewed by media stated publicly that no koalas were in the area and produced a 1992 letter from NPWS supposedly giving them approval to log without a licence, but stating that a Fauna Impact Statement would be neccessary should endangered species be found. Media crews in the forest filmed a baby koala in the trees however, forcing Boral to notify NPWS and stop logging.67

At Nullum State Forest near Murwillumbah, Boral contractors logged old growth forest and destroyed fifty-seven individuals of one of the last known remaining populations of Elaeocarpus sp. "minyon " (a globally endangered plant) and were only stopped after community action.68 According to a report recently released by the NSW Forests Minister operations went ahead without applying the requirements of the Environmental Protection Authority Pollution Control Licence.