This piece is an extract from our Latest from the Woods newsletter (previously Forestry Latest News), which is emailed out at 4PM every Friday with a round-up of the week's top stories. 

To receive our full, free newsletter straight to your email inbox, click here.

IT is the sort of idea that was always likely to inspire a reaction - and that it did. When Forestry Journal reported on the suggestion of a government levy being introduced on all timber sales as a way of funding species diversification it knew there would be much discussion - and there was. 

The idea of putting money from timber sales towards species diversification came from forestry manager Byron Braithwaite in a recently published report - ‘Creating Forests That Thrive in a Changing Climate: Drought and Fire Resilience’ – in which he also argued that vegetation control to reduce fuel loads should be focused on high-use public areas and that cultural change must commence immediately to ensure that we are a fire-aware nation in the future.

However, it was the government levy idea that got people talking. 

Comments from our readers included:

"Jesus Christ!!! How about it funding training programs to get people into the industry?? Instead of an expectation on the contractors to pay for it out of an already cut throat price. Diversify all you want but it’ll be a national park in less than ten years as no one will be left to work it but then again maybe that’s the whole idea… A 'levy' is a good idea but ffs use it properly."

"If there’s an industry levy agreed and it’s used on this, then I give up. Other countries have levies and they use it to sustain the workforce and subsidies towards those helping people trying to get into the industry. Another classic example of cart before the horse! But they’ve used buzzwords like diversity so probably sail through." 

WANT MORE ON THIS? 

"Must be a slow day at FJ towers? I wouldn’t have thought that one academic's report will ever make policy ? However, not against a levy! (there used to be in the 90s), that as per other comments - could be used for industry training - which is a massive current industry requirement."

Whichever side of the 'levy fence' you are on, it seems the report has rekindled a conversation. So in that respect, it's done exactly what it set out to do.