Council’s forestry approach Debate

Community Wellbeing - Cost of Living

Option 2

The comment highlights concerns that current commercial forestry practices are not economically efficient, as they involve exporting wood, which in turn raises the cost of domestic products. The individual suggests that reducing commercial forestry operations and focusing on enhancing native forests and trails could revitalize the tourism industry, potentially making it the primary industry in the area. This shift is seen as a way to improve both the cost of living by stabilizing local product prices and community wellbeing by boosting tourism and preserving natural landscapes.

Table of comments:

Point No

Comment

923.3

We don't need as many commercial forestry operations as we currently have. Yes we need houses but we are not producing only what is necessary. Our forestry industry is profiting off selling wood to other countries at the cost of our land and rivers. This also drives up the cost of Domestic product. the Tasman Bay area is also prone to erosion from the 30% reduced ground water that is caused by pine forest followed by the heavy rains. I propose that we put more emphasis on native forests and trails so that our tourism industry can get back to it's glory days and become our Primary Industry.